A registered trademark’s overriding purpose is to protect your company’s most valuable asset – your brand. We start this week with a David v Goliath trade mark tale. Australians fondly refer to Target as “Tar-Jay.” In 2013, ‘Catch of the Day’ applied to register the logo ‘Tar-Jay by Mumgo.com.au”, directly conflicting with Target’s recent announcement to embrace and integrate “Tar-Jay” into their marketing strategy.

Unsurprisingly, the retail giant opposed this application alleging misleading and deceptive conduct. It is evident why Target’s moniker when used in association with another brand can confuse consumers. Below, we set out why the trade mark was rejected and key takeaways for businesses seeking to register a parody trade mark.     

Why Was the Trade Mark Rejected?

‘Catch of the Day’s’ trade mark application was rejected because it would likely confuse consumers. If a consumer were on their website and saw the mark “Tar-Jay,” it is reasonable to conclude that a visitor would assume there was an affiliation with Target or that the site was operating under the retailer’s umbrella via a license agreement, or as a direct subsidiary.

What Can Other Businesses Learn From “Catch of the Day”?

In this instance, the parody trade mark “Tar-Jay” could have misled the general public. However, there is a fine line between a misleading parody, and one a consumer could easily identify as a parody. If you intend to parody another brand or use a nickname or moniker that references or alludes to another business, a general rule of thumb is that originality works best. Under Australia’s Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth), parody is not a defense to trade mark infringement. A mark cannot deceive or confuse consumers as to the source of the mark. A trade mark will infringe on a registered mark if there are elements that mislead and deceive others.

So, is this a Unique Tale?

There are several success stories of businesses defending their parody trade marks. In the USA, “Snaks Fifth Avenchew”, a canine treat brand, parodied “Saks Fifth Avenue”. Saks sent a cease and desist letter, however, Snacks defended their claim. Canine parodies of high-fashion labels are a common theme in the USA with Chewy Vuiton and Tommy Holedigger also successfully defending claims brought by Louis Vuitton and Tommy Hilfiger.

In Short

If your business’ name is a parody, take steps to confirm that you are not deceiving the public by suggesting an affiliation to the original brand. Also, be prepared that the original brand or registered trade mark owner may challenge your application, so it’s important that you know your rights.

If you have questions about your parody business name, or need to register your trade mark, let our trade mark lawyers know on 1300 544 755.

Sophie Glover
If you would like further information on any of the topics mentioned in this article, please get in touch using the form on this page.
Would you like to get in touch with Sophie about this topic, or ask us any other question? Please fill out the form below to send Sophie a message!

Privacy Policy Snapshot

We collect and store information about you. Let us explain why we do this.

What information do you collect?

We collect a range of data about you, including your contact details, legal issues and data on how you use our website.

How do you collect information?

We collect information over the phone, by email and through our website.

What do you do with this information?

We store and use your information to deliver you better legal services. This mostly involves communicating with you, marketing to you and occasionally sharing your information with our partners.

How do I contact you?

You can always see what data you’ve stored with us.

Questions, comments or complaints? Reach out on 1300 544 755 or email us at info@legalvision.com.au

View Privacy Policy